I agree, I was exaggerating for the argument because I think antinatalism as a whole is dangerous, not for the made up scenario of humanity going extinct, but for the eugenics/fascism side.

You straw man the position and say following the conclusion of the straw man, humanity must end based on their logic.

Ok, what straw man? I've talked about it on the individual level and also in case such ideology spreads, there is literally people that advocate for the end of humanity on the antinatalist ideology, I do not follow it closely to be able to say if it is a big part of it or not, but I've seen it before and seen the stance getting praised and this is extremely dangerous. I'm not making this argument because of the possibility it might happen, being realistic it won't, but because it just helps spread bullshit that blames everything on humanity itself like we are inherently bad.

How isn’t having kids selfish? You’re not having a child for this child’s sake. You’re having the child for your sake.

That makes no sense to me, deciding to birth another human being and dedicating your life to them is the opposite of selfishness. Of course not everyone is like this, and people that just makes children and doesn't give a shit about them are selfish, but the act itself is not.

How? It's the part about taking it to it's logic conclusion, which I said was an exageration?

Why is it a leap in logic? And why having kids is objectively selfish? Genuinely asking.

Quite a few people here on the comments are siding with the antinatalist narrative, but I don't think this is rational at all, in fact it's dangerous. Sure, you can individually opt to not bring more people into the world because you believe it would bring more suffering than happiness, but if this rhetoric spreads, the logical conclusion (heavily extrapolating without considering anything else) is the end of humanity which solves nothing, and while it prevents suffering, it also prevents happiness. If done and advocated in the pretext that we are ruining the planet, that certain people shouldn't be born, and other similar reasoning then this just reeks of ecofascism or plain fascism, and eugenics.

It's easy for us to buy into the narrative that we are all inherently bad and that we as humans are destroying the environment and the world, but this is not true, it's not me and you who are doing this, this is not a human trait, it's a consequence of the system we live in that incentivizes profit above all else. Why do you think awareness, support and accommodations for us needs to be fought over? Because it's expensive and doesn't guarantee profit, and the same can be said about the environment and the way corporations are literally burning the planet. Profit and accumulation of capital above all else, that is the rule.

There's only one way out of this nightmare that will give us the tools to revert the damage and actually build a society and world that will accept us, accommodate to us, liberate people and save the planet, and it's through organizing, studying and fighting.

Realistically, either when we start organizing, protesting and fighting, or when the current system is buried underground.

😊

I don't know how autism affects your life but I can speak for myself and I know it can be tough, executive dysfuntion has been beating my ass hard for a few years at this point.

Still, I do not think I'm broken because of it, years of conditioning by a society that doesn't give a shit about us and want us to do as much or more than everyone else while also laughing at us really fucks me up, even while being aware of these expectations and lack of structural support.

Also, I wouldn't consider myself really me without the special interests and obsessions I had throughout my life and the ways I have talked and expressed it.

What I have just said most likely won't change anything in your life, but I just wanted to aknowledge how hard it can be while also showing a little bit of what makes me happy about my experience being autistic. I hope for the best for you, friend.

You are thinking of liberals like in the US sense, I presume. When we say libs we are talking about neoliberals, which would be both the "left" and the right in the US.

Yeah, and both this feeling and the wealth inequality are only gonna get bigger and bigger as time goes by, that's capitalism.

But there is still hope, a government and state of the working class, for the working class, where the capitalists are the ones oppressed, and not us. A society where profit is not the goal anymore, where the global south is not explored until they drop dead, where the poor and homeless can get what they need, where people can stop worrying about surviving and start living, where we are not a product anymore, but human beings.

This can only happen if people start organizing and start learning what do to and how.

Here are some resources:

In English:

Socialism for Absolute Beginners by Second Thought

Why Social Democracy Isn't Good Enough by Second Thought

Will Life Be Better Under Socialism? by Hakim

"Socialism always fails" is a stupid argument by Hakim

How Capitalism sells poverty as modesty & why equality isn't a practical goal. by Yugopinik

https://dessalines.github.io/essays/

In Portuguese (subbed in english):

Comunismo: princípios básicos e guia de leitura / Communism: basic principles and reading guide by História Pública

How rich comming from someone that doesnt even understand how bullshit ancap is as an ideology.

Also, no one was claiming this piece of shit is a nazi or a fascist.

How about you iluminate us on how the fuck is someone that hates fascists an actual fascist?

Most sane and empathetic libertarian

VLC gave me trouble last year so I ended up using Haruna. The only thing I miss is downloading subtitles, but I can use VLC for that, everything else I think Haruna is near perfection.

Thanks for sharing your story, comrade.

Mine is a bit complicated. For a long time I was just a liberal that considered myself right of center. I've been terminally online for a long time, but only very recently I started interacting online, before I would just lurk 99.99% of the time. Somehow I didn't become a raging ancap or some other shit, but instead I, slowly through the years, became aware of my prejudice, the inequalities in society and started questioning the world.

I think 7 or 8 years ago I got to know the group of friends I had until earlier this year when I decided to get out, the reason being that at least 2 members are actual unironic fascists, and I mean this, they talk about it proudly, and one of them was my best friend. For a long time I was ignorant enough to tolerate them, mostly because I couldn't physically bring myself to confront them about it and because I didn't have enough knowledge to confront their ideas, I also thought for a long time they were only joking because almost anything they said was in an obvious ironic tone. The one that was my best friend knew how to stir any discussion or conversation their way, it was impossible to convince him he was wrong. After I got out of the closet to them, all I received was the usual dismissive talk you'd expect and at that point I was already a left lib. As time passed I tended more to the left and they became even more open about their bullshit ideas, to the point I couldn't take it anymore and after some confrontation and multiple plea for them to change I just left after telling them how wrong they are and that I wouldn't take this shit anymore.

Of course this helped make me hate the right even more alongside the usual bullshit I was already seeing on the internet all the time.

Shortly after I was playing War with my brother and his friends and we started discussing politics (I was the only leftist there), that triggered me to start searching about socialism/communism where I started watching some podcast episodes that hosted debates of Marxist-Leninists against some big liberals here in Brazil. After that I started watching ML youtubers and basically became radicalized this way. Now I'm trying to read theory and I'm watching even more ML content to learn.

I, personally, find it dishonest to call another by their preferred pronouns (I perceive that they are not the sex they wish me to refer to them as, therefore to deny my perception would be to lie.

Oh wow, who would have guessed that a free speech absolutist is a transphobe? Shocking!!!!!

but I am not trying to hate anyone. I don't think they should be treated differently from others, nor am I trying to make them feel unloved or hated in any way; rather, I am simply trying to be honest about what I see.

By denying them their gender you are denying their identity, hating them and treating them differently just because they are trans/nb and making them feel unwelcomed, unloved and hated, something you doesn't do to cis people.

And all that is assuming you can even "tell" when someone is trans.

You're not being honest, you're being a self-centered bigot that clearly doesnt understand gender, neither trans nor non-binary people.

Here's another example: Say I conduct a study that compares the IQ of different ethnicities within a country. If I get results that slant one direction or another, publishing such a study might be deemed hate speech.

Ugh, here we go.

IQ is only ONE measure of skill/"inteligence" that is very limited and doesn't mean much.

Also your example just shows you wouldn't understand the meaning of the results of such study. If the data represent that a given ethnicity got lower scores that's only the start of the study, you then have to go deeper to understand why. Is it because they are "less inteligent", or is it because they are a marginalized group that receive less and poorer education? Is their education on par with the other tested ethnicity? How do another group of the same ethnicity on another conditions/country/whatever fare in the study? Etc, etc, etc.

This have already been done and research suggests the difference encountered is directly correlated with the environment differences, that is, the material conditions of the different groups of people tested.

On the second panel, you see the hateful man holding a book with a cross on it and saying that LGBT people in the background are affronts to God. Later, he is seen become an obvious totalitarian authority of some sort. A Christian might find such a comparison offensive.

So what? Atrocities have been commited in the name of their religion throughout history, why should we care if the christian find it "offensive" that they are depicted in the wrong for the wrong thst they are still doing? They literally brought this upon themselves by allowing this hateful anti-LGBT behavior to still exist within them.

They may truly believe that homosexuality is wrong because that is what their religion teaches.

Then they need to adapt to the times and start seeing LGBT as people like we are. Or they can go fuck themselves. One side is just trying to exist, the other is spewing hateful views and lies about them. There is no space for intolerance in society.

Would preaching that topic become hate speech? Would preaching that RELIGION be considered hate speech?

Yes. Either change your views and adapt or fuck off. If they don't respect people they should not expect to be respected, no matter how much they convinced themselves they are right.

Clássico demais

Ah yes, because everyone on the streets "don't care about themselves".

People are usually on the streets because they have no other choice.

Empathy and understanding others is literally free.

Morality is shaped by your material conditions, that is, the society, culture, religion, thinkers etc. that comprise the place you were born and taught, calling the bourgeoisie immoral psychopaths doesn't really do anything. The way to deal with this is to toss morality aside and see the relations of power for what they are, exploitation of a class by another, as have happened for basically the entirety of human history.

This claims for a solution then, ending the exploitation which necessitates ending the division of classes by preventing that a ruling class comes to existence. This is basically the premise to communism.

The problem with waiting for the current system do collapse is that Capitalism has shown to be much more resilient than expected. The contradictions of capital are intensifying still to this day and more and more people are noticing it, but it is to be expected that the capitalists will do anything they can to keep the machine working.

Trying to change the system from within doesn't really work, like you said, the ruling class is not gonna let their power get taken way. One example of this is what happened on Chile with elected socialist president Salvador Allende 50 years ago.

A change this big in society doesn't happen peacefully, it will need a full out revolution that will lead to "injuries". It is unfortunate and me and, I think, everyone would like it to not be this way, but it is.

Here are some resources for anyone that wants to start learning:

In English:

Socialism for Absolute Beginners by Second Thought

Why Social Democracy Isn't Good Enough by Second Thought

Will Life Be Better Under Socialism? by Hakim

"Socialism always fails" is a stupid argument by Hakim

How Capitalism sells poverty as modesty & why equality isn't a practical goal. by Yugopinik

https://dessalines.github.io/essays/

In Portuguese (subbed in english):

Comunismo: princípios básicos e guia de leitura / Communism: basic principles and reading guide by História Pública

It's not that it is hard on Windows, I at least have never seen anyone claiming that, just that it's annoying having every program self-update or sometimes needing manual updating. A centralized way of updating like you have on Linux is simpler for the end-user, just open the store and update, like smartphones do.

There's other advantages too, like rolling back or downgrading is easier to do and if an update would break or be buggy and it is caught up before being available to everyone, it can be withheld until fixed.